From: John A. T. <ja...@ja...> - 2006-07-10 21:19:07
|
brett lentz wrote: >The distinction I'm making is that, for #1, we don't have to do any of >the multiple walks across the connectivity graph or route comparison >that we'd have to do with #2. > > Then how would it come up with the list of legal routes? >So, instead of incurring the costs associated with finding the best >route, we make the assumption that the user will find it for us. All >we have to do is validate that the user is providing us with a legal >route. > > Aside from the recent suggestion which I haven't had a chance to analyze, these algorithms all generate all possible legal routes and simply choose the maximum valued one. So, the only possible savings would be not counting the value of the cities, but I don't think that saves much. >The UI code will need to be generated anyway, because we're going to >need to show the user the route we're selecting. This is just the >difference between programmatically selecting hexes and acting on the >user's selection of hexes. > > So the user would have to click on hexes they want to use? How would you handle other things like which city circle to use if the next hop in the route being built could be either, or whether to pick up something for treasury money or for dividends? It seems the most straightforward approach would be a listbox of legal routes, sorted by total value. For games that require a maximal run, it could restrict the list, and games which have no other side effects and require a maximal run it shouldn't show the dialog at all. -- John A. Tamplin ja...@ja... 770/436-5387 HOME 4116 Manson Ave Smyrna, GA 30082-3723 |